At its heart, naturally enough, was a staunch defence of self-regulation. You would hardly expect the chairman of the Press Complaints Commission, to say anything else.

But that itself rested on an opening argument that many politicians and commentators will regard as contentious - that "the British press has filled the democratic deficit" caused by a dysfunctional House of Commons.

She said: "It must be true that the freer journalists are to criticise, scrutinise, and analyse, the more trustworthy institutions become. That is because without freedom of the press, there is no real accountability to the public."

Freedom requires the lightest touch regulation, of course, and the PCC is a fine example of that, she contended. To illustrate why that touch is so light she pointed out that the commission has just 14 staff with a budget of £1.9m, compared to the Advertising Standard Authority's £8m and the Information Commissioner's £10.5m.

(The hint was obvious. This is far too small a budget for a regulator and she wants owners to stump up more in future).

Yet, despite the budgetary pressures, she spoke of the PCC's penchant for being proactive - phoning health authorities when the first cases of swine flu were diagnosed; contacting local authorities when two girls in Scotland committed suicide; calling police when a man hanged himself in Belfast two weeks ago; speaking to representatives of Stephen Gately's family after his death.

"We make sure people are not approached by journalists or photographers when they need some space," she said, revealing that Simon Cowell and Fabio Capello, "have successfully used the PCC to give them some freedom from intrusive paparazzi." They preferred to use the PCC than go to court.

Given that the PCC is doing so well, why has she initiated a "fundamental" review into its governance structures? It turns out it is "to reassure politicians, opinion formers and - most importantly of all - the public that we are robust enough and responsible enough to be left alone."

But she conceded that the PCC does need to "become more transparent and accountable" and pledged that she will ensure that happens, though not as "the expense of freedom of speech and expression."

Nor would she be drawn on the latter when being interviewed on this morning's Radio 4 Today programme. Again, that's hardly surprising.

But it did mean that she failed to deal with the substantive criticisms levelled at the PCC (except for its lack of transparency). Doubtless, we must await the outcome of the current governance review before we discover whether Buscombe takes us into a new era. The sooner we get to see the review report the better.

That said, though I am a little alarmed by her views on commercial media and her BBC remark, it was a reasonable defence, offering a coherent explanation for the way it goes about much of its business in secrecy.